I don't see why an A320 wouldn't be able to fly with that fence removed (even on one side). They are not that big and even with one missing it would throw the trim off but I bet it would fly better then a B17 used to fly limping back from Germany with chunks missing out of it.

 

QF32 also showed us what an A380 can fly around with, but neither the A380 pilots nor the B17 pilots would have taken off with a plane already in that condition, especially not with paying passengers on board. The point I was trying to make was that not only will an A320 probably fly perfectly well without a fence, it will fly well enough to carry passengers safely.

Looks like a repaired (albeit temporarily) rather than damaged area to me. It would appear that it's been taken to with a grinder to smooth off the edges (and remove discontinuities). That should stop cracks forming.

Makes me wonder if some of the maintenance ad-hocing that resulted in the MD80 loss is creeping back into Alaska's maintenance. There are procedures for marking dents and damage on aircraft. You mark it when damage has been found, inspected and found within service limits so that subsequent crews and rampers will not keep reporting to mx control the damage. Writing 'we know about' is probably not the way that procedure is outlined in their maintenance manuals.

Writing 'we know about' is probably not the way that procedure is outlined in their maintenance manuals.

At least not in times of youtube and things. But Mike had a good point I think. I couldn't tell about the severity of the issue, just the 'easygoing' impression it leaves behind.

At least not in times of youtube and things. But Mike had a good point I think. I couldn't tell about the severity of the issue, just the 'easygoing' impression it leaves behind.

 

I'm pretty sure even if the maintenance people hadn't written anything there would have been an OMG MY PLANE HAD A HOLE IN IT!!!!1!!! post all over facebook/twitter/whatever.